In the midst of dramatic changes in the global agriculture and food landscape, it is important to simultaneously increase productivity and improve sustainability to strengthen resilient agrifood systems.

In this regard, Japan has accumulated valuable knowledge, experience and technologies that can contribute to the Asia-Pacific region in building sustainable and resilient agriculture and food systems. Japan is more than willing to share these expertise and experiences with Members, including through future events co-organized with FAO and its platforms with a view to  developing partnerships among Members, as well as public and private sectors.

In this context, Japan and ASEAN countries have adopted a cooperation plan called the ASEAN-Japan Midori Cooperation Plan for Strengthening Cooperation towards Enhancing Resilient and Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems for Ensuring Regional Food Security, at the Meeting of ASEAN-Japan Ministers on Agriculture and Forestry held in October last year. Our cooperation is ongoing, and various projects are planned to be implemented soon.

Japan also considers it is essential to strengthen coordination among all stakeholders to  achieve resilience through the transformation of agriculture and food systems. Public-private-farmers coordination should be enhanced, as well as enhance private sectors’ investment by ensuring investment environment for them.

Australia appreciates FAO’s efforts to support agrifood systems transformation to build resilience to climate change and natural disasters. Resilient agri-food systems are inclusive, support livelihoods, ensure food security and nutrition, and enhance efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

Australia reaffirms actions identified at the Asia-Pacific Symposium on Agrifood Systems Transformation, detailed in paragraph 16 of the paper, as mechanisms to accelerate transformation. We recommend FAO continue its support to Members for bringing these catalytic actions to reality.

Australia strongly supports FAO’s risk-based, evidence-driven approach to assessing vulnerabilities and preparing responses to support more resilient and sustainable agrifood systems. This transparent, science-, and risk-based approach complements Australia’s outcomes-focused, commonsense, no one-size-fits-all approach to agricultural sustainability, supported by transparent, predictable, open, and fair markets. We encourage FAO to continue with this approach.

We also highlight FAO’s role in developing normative products and standards in issues such as biosecurity (including through the IPPC) and food safety (through CODEX Alimentarius) as fundamental to sustainable and resilient agrifood systems. We recommend FAO increase core funding to CODEX Alimentarius and the IPPC in FAO’s 2026-27 PWB process to ensure these bodies and workstreams have appropriate resources to carry out their important mandates.

Australia appreciates the recognition of the contributions of Indigenous peoples, their knowledge and expertise, in supporting sustainability and resilience. We encourage FAO to continue to work with Members to support Indigenous peoples’ active participation in agrifood systems transformation at the global, regional/subregional, country and local levels.

The Pacific region has many of the world’s countries most vulnerable to climate change, and we recognise that SIDS have regressed in SDG indicators related to climate and disaster resilience. It is evident that countries in the Pacific are experiencing the immediate reality of rising sea levels due to climate change, as well as disasters.

Australia recognises that loss and damage is a priority issue for the Pacific, and SIDS more generally, who are experiencing growing impacts from climate change. We note FAO’s assessment that the partial and inconsistent data on agrifood systems leads to difficulties and incomplete understanding of the loss and damage caused by climate change and disasters, and recognise this as a specific issue in the Pacific region. Australia recommends FAO work to address data gaps and limitations in the Pacific, by supporting and building capacity for enhanced data collection and analysis on loss and damage. This will also enable tools such as FAO’s RIMA to better represent Pacific circumstances.

We appreciate FAO’s development of the online tool, FAO’s Damage and Loss Assessment Methodology, to make loss and damage data collection and assessment easier. We recommend FAO report to Members on the use and success of the tool.

We strongly support the identification of the need to repurpose support provided to agricultural producers (at paragraph 43), to mobilise investment in climate-resilient agrifood systems, research and development and infrastructure for greater resilience. An estimated USD 540 billion per year of global government spending on agricultural support is environmentally harmful and continues to prop up unsustainable practices. These policies can depress prices received by farmers in other countries, stunt agricultural development, undermine livelihoods and increase price volatility. They can also result in higher emissions and hinder climate change adaptation.

Australia welcomes the GCF undertaking projects that facilitate the re-orientation of agricultural subsidies to support climate resilient agriculture. We recommend that FAO continue to support Members to repurpose government support for agriculture producers towards climate resilient and low emissions agriculture. We encourage FAO to work with International Financial Institutions in monitoring relevant initiatives and projects and to prepare a follow-up report on its 2021 joint report with the UNDP and UNEP.

FAO thanks Australia for the re-affirmed support to agrifood systems transformation as key to ensure food security and nutrition and to build resilience to climate change and disasters in the region.  Australia’s recommendation for FAO’s continued support to Members to implement the catalytic actions identified at the Asia-Pacific Symposium on Agrifood Systems Transformation is well noted and will be implemented.   

We are pleased to note Australia’s strong support for the risk-based and evidence-driven approach presented in the paper and its complementarities to Australia’s approach to sustainable agriculture. 

FAO takes note of Australia’s recommendations on FAO’s role in developing normative products and standards in biosecurity and to increase core funding to CODEX Alimentarius and the IPPC in FAO’s 2026-27 PWB.  Biosecurity and food safety are critical issues in building resilient and sustainable agrifood systems. In the Pacific, FAO is working with SPC to prepare a regional biosecurity programme, targeting the Green Climate Fund (GCF).

Working with Indigenous Peoples and ensuring their active participation continue to be an important priority for FAO at all levels. FAO is pleased to report on its recent efforts to standardize the mainstreaming of Indigenous Peoples participation as well as issues of land tenure and inclusive land governance in FAO programme/projects in the region, through, amongst others, the implementation of the new FAO Framework for Environmental and Social Management.

FAO fully agrees on the need to build capacity and support the Pacific countries to address the gaps in loss and damage data and information management. In 2023, with catalytic funding from FAO HQ for Better Life, FAO provided the first training in the Pacific on the FAO Damage and Loss Assessment Methodology as well as new approaches in disaster risk management such as Anticipatory Action. This training will continue for four more countries in 2024 while FAO has launched Anticipatory Action in Fiji to get ready for the El Nino. FAO is working with partners to mobilize resources to scale up capacity building in the Pacific on accounting for Loss and Damage and Anticipatory Action.    

Earlier FAO also supported several Asian countries to use the FAO Damage and Loss Assessment Methodology. With the recent launch of the online tool, FAO is looking into a comprehensive capacity building programme, especially for SIDS, LDCs and LLDCs.  Australia’s recommendation for FAO to report to Members on the use of the tools is well noted.

New Zealand welcomes the important paper and focus on building resilience through agrifood systems transformation. There will not be one country represented in the region that has not felt the impact of extreme weather events on agricultural production and for New Zealand the extent of these events has significantly impacted on key parts of our food production system.  What resilience looks like might be different in different countries but the importance of being well prepared is universal.

The SIDS of the SWP region are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change not only to the damage and destruction due to climate change related events but also the loss of productive lands due to rising sea levels. Much of the content of the paper on building resilience through agrifood systems transformation is Asian focused and while supporting the important work in Asia, does the lack of reference to activities in the Pacific reflect the situation in the Pacific?   The paper refers to six of the ten top countries affected by climate change being in the region but not one of these countries is from the South West Pacific? We question these figures as we know that countries in the SWP have been severely impacted on food security and economic bases by climate change already due to warming water temperate. Furthermore, we are aware that countries in the SWP are disappearing due to rising sea levels. The Pacific must have a greater recognition which reflects their circumstances and is captured in the data being used.

We note that there has been significant FAO support for the Asian region in assistance with national agrifood systems transformation pathways and a number of projects operationalised to date (para 17 of the report). It is stated in the paper that the Pacific Islands will be similarly supported in 2024 and we would appreciate more detail on what that support looks like and how that is determined.  Also what consultation will be undertaken in determining what assistance looks like and where it will focus?

We are pleased to see the response to the specific request from APRC36 with the development of a regional plan promoting cohesive action on mainstreaming biodiversity across agriculture sectors. We would appreciate an update on what the steps are regarding implementation and monitoring of the regional plan?

For New Zealand the role of indigenous people’s traditional knowledge and practices in building resilience is important and it is recommended that FAO should continue to support a focus on indigenous people knowledge and practices noting that this does not currently feature in the paper on building resilience.

We note that the release of the FAO Roadmap released at COP 28 which looks at accelerated climate action to transform agrifood systems and help achieve food security and nutrition should be part of the discussion on building resilience.  We would appreciate an update on the Roadmap and its importance for the region and in particular how the specific vulnerabilities of the SWP are being addressed within the roadmap.

New Zealand supports the inclusion of the Blended finance to boost action and access to technology section, which discusses the opportunities that can be found in repurposing environmentally harmful agricultural subsides. New Zealand would also welcome the scaling up of FAO support to countries that seek to access funding from GEF and GCF, because the capability and capacity to apply for these funds is not always available across all SWP countries limiting the opportunities for them to transform their agrifood systems.

We strongly support the ongoing normative work of FAO in providing technical expertise and in supporting the timely development of global standards through Codex Alimentarius and the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) that support evidence and rules based regional and global trade, which are important in supporting resilience and the improvement of regional and global food security.

FAO fully agree with New Zealand’s pertinent comment on the particular vulnerability of the SWP SIDS, not only to extreme weather events but also long-term climate change impacts such as sea level rise. 

We would like to clarify that the global climate risk index that ranked six Asian countries as part of the global ten countries most affected by climate change during 2000-2019 (https://www.germanwatch.org/sites/default/files/Global%20Climate%20Risk%20Index%202021_2.pdf)  

must not be mistaken for a comprehensive climate vulnerability scoring.  It bases on past data and represents only one important piece of the puzzle of climate impacts and vulnerabilities. It focuses on extreme weather events (such as storms, floods, and heatwaves) but does not take into account important slow onset processes such as droughts, rising sea levels, glacier melting and ocean warming or acidification. It is also important to note that due to data gaps, especially long term comparable data including socio-economic data, some very small countries such as certain SIDS are not included in this analysis.  

We thank New Zealand’s comment that helps us recognize that the paper could have presented more available examples of FAO support and actions in the Pacific, such as:

To help Members translate the National Pathway for Food Systems Transformation into capacity development roadmap and investment portfolio, sub-regional workshops were organized in November 2023 for South and Southeast Asia. A similar workshop is planned for the Pacific Islands in 2024.

As mentioned in the response to Australia’s comments above, FAO has started training on loss and damage data, information management for the Pacific Islands, as well as new approaches in managing disaster risks and strengthening preparedness such as Anticipatory Action.

The Pacific Action Plan to promote cohesive action to mainstream biodiversity across agriculture sectors has been drafted, in consultation with Pacific Members and submitted as an information paper in APRC37.  The Action Plan is a guiding document for Pacific countries to adapt in their national policies and programmes. Upon Pacific Members’ request, FAO will develop national or a regional programme to implement the Action Plan using GEF Global Biodiversity Fund or other relevant resources. FAO welcomes the financial and technical partners to work with FAO to expedite the implementation and monitoring of priority actions identified by Members at Pacific regional and national levels. The Pacific Action Plan may be updated in 2030 to reflect the progress of identified actions and changing priorities. 

FAO takes notes of New Zealand’s recommendation to continue to support and highlight the important role of Indigenous Peoples’ traditional knowledge and practices in building resilience.  An example of FAO’s action in this regard is provided in FAO’s response to Australia’s comments above.  Furthermore, more good practices could be documented and disseminated, as recommended by Japan.

FAO appreciate New Zealand’s encouragement of FAO’s efforts in developing innovative, blended finance including support to repurpose unsustainable agriculture subsidies.  We note the recommendation to scale up FAO support to SWP countries to access GEF and GCF and are pleased to report a significant increase of FAO GEF-8 projects as well as the good progress in developing the multi-million US dollar GCF programme, with both readiness and full-size projects in the SWP countries.    

1.Resilience to multiple risks is one of the characteristics that is aimed to ensure a more sustainable food system. Agriculture and fishery, nonetheless, bear the brunt of environmental events, foremost of which is climate change that is causing the occurrence of more frequent and intense typhoons resulting to tsunamis and huge flooding or the contrary situation of long spell of drought/dryness.

2. Over the next five years, the Philippine government will be initiating shockresponsive programs that will prepare the food system, especially as we pursue the move to transform it, to cope with covariate risks. The Philippine Development Plan 2023-2028, for example, already espouses the implementation of the Philippine Adaptive and Shock-Responsive Roadmap (ASRSP), which was formulated with the support of FAO. Mitigation and adaptation measures that facilitate food system transformation are also increasingly being considered in government planning, policy-making.

3. Currently, innovative solutions are continuously being developed and pursued to strengthen and improve the resiliency of food system including its supply chain to enhance food security. Key activities include conducting quick assessments and value chain mapping for various agricultural products to improve and upgrade the processes and links and promote the greater acceptance of the products. Ecosystem restoration and biodiversity action, involving resource inventory, biodiversity assessments, and ecosystem accounting are also being pursued. A pivotal measure in mitigating hazards, building resilience, and reducing vulnerabilities is the diversification of livelihood activities that is collaboratively being implemented by different agencies of the government. These measures are necessary initial steps towards the food system transformation process.

4. We continue, nonetheless, to look forward to stronger collaboration with FAO in putting in place additional measures to accelerate agri-food system transformation especially in the following key areas:

a) Improving physical and digital infrastructure through (i) upgrading of processing, postharvest, and storage facilities, with emphasis on cold chain technology (e.g., community fish landing centers) and sustainable infrastructure (e.g., green ports), (ii) integrating and improving the interoperability of AFF information systems to harness the Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies (e.g., big data, blockchain, and Internet of Things), and (iii) developing and increasing the outreach of mobile- and web-based platforms for marketing, payment, and product delivery;

b) Undertaking further research, development, and extension on climate- and disaster-resilient technologies. Conduct of joint R&D, capacity buildings, and knowledge-sharing may focus on (i) location-specific, sensor-based, and precision agriculture to amplify the utilization of production inputs in a sustainable manner, (ii) weather, fertilizer, and conservation information and management practices, and (iii) commercialization of developed AFF technologies;

c) Establishing innovation hubs and technology demonstration sites to provide space for researchers, entrepreneurs, and other stakeholders to collaborate and develop new AFF technologies and practices;

d) Developing and mainstreaming early warning systems/ anticipatory mechanisms, particularly in using remote-sensing and satellite-based technologies to predict supply chain disruptions, pests, and disease outbreaks, including damage and loss assessment in the aftermath of disasters. These technologies can also be used in monitoring management activities within protected areas;

e) Enhancing food safety measures and quarantine procedures through knowledge sharing, capacity building, and collaborative research on quarantine operations, animal disease diagnosis, plant pest detection, laboratory practices, and biosecurity and disease management; and

f) Encouraging greater innovation in the food sector through investments and joint R&D on (i) innovative food safety technologies (i.e., contaminant detection, preservation) to reduce loss and waste of nutritious foods, maximize food production, and reduce climate impacts; (ii) large-scale food fortification to deliver vitamins and minerals through everyday food; and (iii) processing and packaging technologies that prolong shelf life and improve the nutritional content of food products.

5. In collaboration with international partners and organizations like FAO, the Philippines is determined to pioneer transformative initiatives that will strengthen our agrifood systems, ensuring resilience, food security, and proper nutrition for our people.

FAO thanks the Philippines for sharing insights on building resilience of agriculture, fishery and food systems to multiple risks and the comprehensive policy initiatives and innovative solutions being pursued in the country.  FAO is pleased that its support such as for the Adaptive Shock-Responsive Social Protection Roadmap has contributed to the progress.

FAO also looks forward to stronger collaboration with the Philippines, especially in pioneering transformative initiatives.  

• We recognized the importance of agrifood transformation.
• Thailand would like to emphasize that climate change impacts on agri-food systems with the huge challenges affecting the achievement of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) of each country.
• Thailand places importance on awareness building mechanism and
• educating all stakeholder to protect, nourishing, and preserving soil nutrient and
• water resources which is the foundation of the food production process, ecosystems, and human well-being by following implementation guidelines such as Integrated soil fertility and water management through developing small-scale water resources in farmland and soil Volunteer doctor initiative.
• Thailand is implementing a capacity-building project to strengthen farmers’ ability to cope with climate change in Thailand’s river basins through effective water management and sustainable agriculture in which we received financial support from the Green Climate Fund aims to improve water management, food security, and the agricultural livelihoods of river basin residents leading to appropriate decision making in farming, building infrastructure that combines construction architecture and ecosystem-based adaptation measures and empowering farmers capacity-building to adapt to climate change phenomenal.
• Importantly, Rice also faces significant impacts from climate change. Thailand has piloted a cooperative project to support farmers in adapting to climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions from farming activities. The Thai Rice NAMA (Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action) project has supported hundreds of thousands of farmers by promoting technologies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions from farming activities especially within irrigated central plain resulted in increased income for farmers who are struggling with climate change impact. The success of this project has been extended to the Strengthening Climate-Smart Rice Farming Project, the ambitious target to reach 250,000 rice-growing farmers.
• Thailand has started a development project to reduce greenhouse gas emissions during the production of economic crops (sugar cane, oil palm, cassava, rubber, durian, and mango) to certify carbon credits and also equip officials to be evaluators under the framework of T-VER (Thailand Voluntary Emission Reduction Program) and to improve standard benchmark for carbon credit management in such economic crops.
• Thailand is willing to exchange and share knowledge with FAO member
• countries in order to boost food security and food safety and sustainable agri-food
• systems in Asia and Pacific region.
• Recommendation:

1. Undertake further research and development regarding methodologies related to climate change which can be applied  to the national situation.
2. Request capacity building for the national to access the global financial and investment established under international climate change for the agri food systems transformation.

FAO thanks Thailand for sharing many interesting initiatives being pursued to cope with climate change and building resilience.

FAO shares Thailand’s emphasis on integrated soil and water management as fundamental for resilient and sustainable agrifood systems. 

Thailand’s willingness to share knowledge and experience to boost food security, food safety and the resilient and sustainable agrifood systems is appreciated.

Kiribati supports the report presented. Unfortunately, internet from our end is not that excellent that our connections drop here and there affecting our hearing of the presentation and interventions.

Anyways Kiribati first of all, would like to congratulate the Chair for your appointment and look forward to work with you in your biannual stewardship. Also, our congratulations to Philippines in their appointment to be the rapporteur of this APRC37. Not forgetting the host for the meeting, Sri Lanka, many thanks for the great organization.

Kiribati though would like to request FAO to please focus assistance to our National Food Systems efforts to build a resilient food system. We also would like to request FAO to assist Kiribati in its water needs for agriculture. Climate Change impacts especially the drought is a challenging phenomenon to our agriculture.

South South Cooperation is one approach that we can all share our lessons or share technologies and innovations from each other. Kiribati would like to request for the SSC however would like to request for competent English-speaking technicians.

Kiribati is a net import country on food items. Building a strong biosecurity is critical to ensure transboundry diseases of animals and plants are kept out from our vulnerable island state. Strengthening the assistance rendered from IPPC and Codex Alimentarious is also needed for strengthening our Biosecurity front lines.

Data gap is a challenge for agriculture in Kiribati as correctly highlighted by Australia and NZ reps. If FAO can assist in this area – that would be greatly appreciated as collecting these data to make sound analysis on our food security status is critical.

In conclusion, Kiribati would like to thank FAO for the support to our farmers/people in their pursuit to increase local production in the on-going food security programs/projects.